EU antitrust chief tells Tim Cook Apple must allow third-party app stores
appleinsider.com
The European Union's Margrethe Vestager has met with leaders of US Big Tech firms to discuss their operations in the EU, and with Apple's Tim Cook concentrated on the App Store and Apple Music.

EU antitrust chief to Tim Cook: Apple must allow third-party app stores::The European Union’s Margrethe Vestager has met with leaders of US Big Tech firms to discuss their operations in the EU, and with Apple’s Tim Cook concentrated on the App Store and Apple Music.

  • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyzEnglish
    5·
    11 months ago

    I won’t call you names but this literally doesn’t make any sense to me. In no way would the apple app store be affected, your walled garden is safe. To (attempt to) extend the metaphor, this is like giving you the option to take walks in other gardens, but your walled garden is still where you left it, gate locked.

    • exothermic@lemmy.worldEnglish
      31·
      11 months ago

      Thank you, I appreciate your response.

      I just wish someone could explain to me the benefits of doing this? Who stands to benefit financially? Who are the stakeholders? Why can webapps not be used instead? Do side loaded apps have access to apples APIs, do webapps not? Can apple, like Reddit charge for use of said APIs?

      Also, why does everyone seem to portray such a personal stance on the subject, how would allowing side apps benefit any of those who have downvoted me in their day to day lives.

      • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyzEnglish
        2·
        11 months ago

        Apple is interested in maintaining full control of what apps can be on their platform and how they are presented because it gives them power over negotiations with companies that build the apps. They are basically able to “name their price” and make sure they are always getting as big of a cut as they would like.

        The EU is interested in not letting them do that because that kind of “negotiating” behavior is pretty well understood to be anti-consumer. Increased costs for app developers are usually passed directly onto the consumer through the prices. And it tends to get worse over time.

        No company anywhere wants to use webapps anymore. Apps installed on devices are free advertising and access to user data. It is frustrating but the way it is, on all devices, already. So basically the answer is the same as why can’t most apps that already exist on all devices anyways just be web apps.

        I don’t think sideloaded would be quite the right word, this is about access to other app stores (like the google play store or amazon app store, or more niche ones) that would then formally and automatically install and maintain apps exactly the same way the apple app store already does, presumably just with a different library of apps to choose from.

        Apps from another app store would need no access to any API by apple unless they were specifically interacting with apple services, AFAIK. Which, would be under the full control of apple and apple chooses who uses it, how, and how much they use it, but that is already the case regardless.

        I tried to answer your confusions as best as I can do with what I know already. As for why people take this so personally, I would say it is a complex topic combining businesses that are constantly trying to drive each other out of business with the social effects of making the tool people use to communicate a status symbol. And it has been brewing for long enough that people are getting extreme opinions and fostering long term grudges based on personal experience, to the point that some people have some real hatred towards anyone who has a different phone OS than them.

        This was a long comment to type and I did it while laying in bed half asleep. Sorry if it has a bunch of typos or errors lol

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        1·
        11 months ago

        These are weird questions.

        Who stands to benefit financially?

        The developer, if they are distributing themselves. Also potentially no one. That shouldn’t really be a concern though, why are you concerned with what seems to amount to “someone needs to be making money off me, I want it to be Apple!”

        Who are the stakeholders?

        Again, literally anyone or no one.

        Why can webapps not be used instead?

        Why can’t you use a web app for all your PC applications? Because native APis are always going to be more expansive than what is made available to a web UI.

        Do side loaded apps have access to apples APIs, do webapps not?

        It’s a mixed bag. Some yes, some no. But you’re generally going to be able to do more with native apps than a web app.

        Can apple, like Reddit charge for use of said APIs?

        Why… would you charge for local API access? You’re paying for the hardware, you’re paying for the computation time, you’re paying for the electricity, why would Apple get paid?

        Also, why does everyone seem to portray such a personal stance on the subject, how would allowing side apps benefit any of those who have downvoted me in their day to day lives.

        Apple explicitly doesn’t allow certain kinds of apps on the App Store. Many of those can be replicated in a web app, but not all. One easy example is game emulation. You can do some emulation in a web app, but the performance isn’t going to be great. You can sideload an app that does it better, and you can actually force load with a different flag to have them work even better than that. One such emulator is Delta.

        I’m a little concerned on your line of questioning honestly. It seems like you’re extremely concerned that the (first or second depending on the day) largest company in the world is going to lose out on a little money. Why are you so invested in them making money? How does Apple making more money benefit you in your day to day life?